Radio Free Éireann
WBAI 99.5FM Pacifica Radio
New York City
17 May 2014
(begins time stamp 30:45)
JM: Last week Suzanne Breen wrote a story that most of the newspapers really didn't pick up on and here's just part of it:
(John reads from Breen's article )
But then comes a startling sentence: 'They claimed I was turned by special branch during interrogation in Belfast’s Palace Barracks in 1972 and that I became an MI5 agent.'(John ends)
Rumours that Mr Adams was recruited by the British intelligence services have been around in militant republican circles for decades and certainly strengthened after the 1994 ceasefire.
Some unionists have also long suspected that he was a protected species during the conflict.
‘Tout’ was recently scrawled on the new wall mural to him on the Falls Road but beyond the graffiti artists, many of his own former IRA comrades have raised questions about him. However, if police officers made the very same accusation, as he himself says they did, it’s a first.
With us on the line from Belfast is Suzanne. Now, Suzanne, you got this one sentence from an article that Gerry Adams wrote but there was no denying it or saying it was outrageous before the comment or after the comment which I thought was very strange that he didn't deny anything.
Breen: I believe he put it out there, John, to take control of the situation. Because this information that police officers interrogating him, accused him, said as a statement of fact, that he had been an agent for MI5, this could be potentially very damaging for him further along the line. And I think that he was deliberately putting it out there to take control of the situation and hoping that if he did that it would go away. And that strategy appears to have worked because I was quite amazed that the rest of the media didn't pick up on this allegation. Now maybe I'm wrong but I would have thought that it is not something that police officers, experienced detectives, would just throw about willy-nilly to someone as senior a member of the political establishment like Mr. Adams. I would have thought that if they were going to put that allegation to him it would have to be well-grounded. It would have to be based on documents, on serious intelligence, on something that they know that the rest of us don't know.
SB: Suzanne, one of the things that always raised suspicions was that the RUC actually saved Gerry Adams' life when there was an attempt to assassinate him. He may even have been the only one who was saved in that circumstance. And I know that always raised doubts in people's minds.
Breen: That's true, Sandy. In the early 1980's when there was an assassination attempt on him we now know that the bullets were doctored in advanced so that they wouldn't actually kill him. There are other incidents where agents within the Loyalist paramilitaries moved to prevent other attacks on Gerry Adams.
There was a planned attack by the UDA in 1988 in which they were going to attach a limpet mine with a magnetic clamp to a car in which he was traveling and that was actually foiled by the British agent in that terror organization, Brian Nelson.
And why I think Mr. Adams may be putting out this allegation now that he's a agent is because there is a danger that it's going to be leaked in future. Leaked either by perhaps disgruntled police officers who were involved in this investigation into Jean McConville but much more likely the McConville family we believe are going to take a civil case against Mr. Adams.
And as part of that civil case they would be likely to get a transcript of his interview notes from police and those interview notes obviously would contain this allegation. So I think Gerry Adams knows that the McConvilles are likely to get this information at some point in the future and of course they're going to go public with it.
JM: But you also have Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness announcing to the press that anybody who has any information on attacks in the previous thirty years to please come forward - help the PSNI. And here when people do come forward, say with the Boston tapes, as say: well...here's what I know about this and that – Adams and them are calling them and McIntyre – they're calling them “touts” and how dare that they give up this type of information. Gerry Adams likes to have it both ways: he wants, publicly, to tell people: Come forward if you know anything about it. And then when the people do come forward, say like Brendan Hughes: alright, I'll come forward about the McConville thing. Here's what I know ... And then they say: Oh, how dare you come forward like this and give this information.
Breen: There is a huge hypocrisy here and Sinn Féin are attempting to have it both ways. You either support the police or you don't support the police. And there really is no logic in Martin McGuinness standing shoulder to shoulder with the then PSNI Chief Constable Sir Hugh Orde after the Massereene attack in which two soldiers were killed and calling for information to be given to the police and for people to cooperate with the police.
After police officer Ronan Kerr's murder Sinn Féin leaders did exactly the same but yet they will not stand shoulder to shoulder with Matt Baggott, the police Chief Constable now, and call for information on Jean McConville's murder.
It really, really appears to be totally, totally, double standards. People are accused of being “touts”. Republicans are accused of being “touts” who simply talked to academics, who talked to journalists. These Republicans haven't talked to the police. They have just said what they wanted to say, they have divulged things to academics and journalists and yet they're “touts”. But yet Sinn Féin leaders are calling on other Republicans to talk about dissident Republican murders and that's being a good citizen. So there's a massive hypocrisy here.
JM: And that brings me now to the next article you wrote, it's the cult-like status of Gerry Adams. There wouldn't be a political party here in the United States or you would think in Ireland that would be brought in to be questioned about a killing from thirty years ago, be brought in about his brother and him going to gaol about the sexual allegations made there. But it just seems that no matter what is said about Gerry Adams, either people don't believe it or they just say that's yesterday's news. And Suzanne, I don't know if it's a Belfast thing but when he got out of gaol and he had a press conference in front of the wall mural they had signs that said: “Our Gerry. Our Leader.” Like, you would never see that in the United States say: Our Barack. Our Leader. It was such to me looking at that type of sign - what does that mean – Our Gerry? That's sort of a Belfast colloquialism like, here's “our Gerry”. But they broke it down on that type of level with the protest signs that they were holding up.
Breen: There were actually people out with dozens of gold-framed photographs. Now they did not appear overnight. This was well planned and well-calculated and these were clearly given to the crowd. The sad thing is that there is truth in it. Do we live in the North of Ireland or do we live in North Korea? Because that to me really is what it resembles. It is like people can lose their independent thought, their ability to analyse situations and just blindly fall into this devotion to a leader.
There is of course nothing wrong with loyalty. There is nothing wrong with people liking their leaders, loving their leaders, caring for their leaders, supporting them but when it come to the point of view where minds are closed to all facts and all information then it really is worrying. And this cult-like devotion to Gerry Adams reached its zenith for me when he was released from Antrim police station and he came back to what was billed as a press event but was really like more a homecoming party and all that was missing was alcohol and the yellow ribbons. And there was cheering and applause from the group of Republicans gathered.
The atmosphere really didn't do justice to the fact that this was a murder suspect being released. Had a leading Loyalist been arrested and questioned, for example about the McGurk's Bar, in which Catholics died and they were clapped and cheered and there was this party-carnival atmosphere people would have been saying it was in appalling bad taste.
If when Colin Duffy was found not guilty or the murder soldiers at Massereene, if dissident Republicans had held a similar event they would have been cursed to high heaven and rightfully so. It would have been judged as just totally insulting to the victims and to their families. And yet, Sinn Féin engaged in this behaviour and got away with it. Nobody in the media uttered a word.
SB: Suzanne, is this kind of treatment of Republican leaders a new thing? Because I don't remember for instance the late Ruarí Ó Brádaigh, who was the Chief-of-Staff of the IRA, Presdient of Sinn Féin, I don't think people ever treated him that way. Brendan Hughes was the legendary commander of the IRA in Belfast and revered by many people. But I don't think he ever got this kind of treatment. So is this a very new thing?
Breen: I think it is a new thing and there is some talk that there is an urge to replace Bobby Sands actually as the icon of modern Republicanism -- to replace that with Gerry Adams. Gerry Adams has compared himself very cleverly to Bobby Sands -- that was the main comparison he made when he was released -- he said how he thought as he penned his little writings in the police cell that he thought of Bobby and he thought of Bobby's writings. So he was very cleverly comparing himself to Bobby Sands.
Bobby Sands of course went sixty-seven days without food before he died. Mr. Adams had four days with food just he didn't like the food that the police gave him in an Antrim cell. So the comparisons really don't run very deep in terms of their contribution to the Provisional Republican Movement in terms of their suffering but that's the comparison that Mr. Adams still is very, very keen to make.
JM: You're listening to Radio Free Éireann and we're speaking with Suzanne Breen, who's a free-lance journalist in The Six Counties and has been covering The Troubles for thirty years. Suzanne, before we go: elections are coming up next Friday for the European election and local councils. What have you been hearing? What are some of the polls that are coming out? And has this hurt Sinn Féin?
Breen: I don't think that it's hurt Sinn Féin at all. I think Sinn Féin will poll very strongly. Elections here in reality are nothing more that a sectarian head count. The SDLP have in my opinion fought a very poor campaign and they have the tag of losers all over them. People like winners. And there has been a draining off of the Nationalist electorate after the IRA ceasefire of 1994. I would expect Sinn Féin to poll very strongly and to come out as the major party once again in Northern Ireland. I think they'll do very,very well in this election.
JM: And what do you think about down South?
Breen: Down South the Jean McConville allegations will hurt them much more than in The North. But they have the advantage there of being a party which is not tarnished with involvement in government. And at a time of recession and when people are finding it very, very hard to make ends meet Sinn Féin can play the “radical outsider” when it actually is, certainly in The North, very much a part of the establishment but it can play a radical card down South that may appeal to voters.
JM: Thank you, Suzanne, for coming on and participating here and giving us a little insight into what's going on.
Breen: Thank you.
(ends time stamp 43:10)
As an historian who is herself working on a book depicting one of the horrific chapters of the Troubles - the torture of the Hooded Men by British security forces in 1971 - I agree with Suzanne's observation about those who have chosen to tell their stories. Most of the men with whom I spoke are not Sinn Fein supporters, and do not hold current Sinn Fein leadership in high esteem. They spoke to me thought, not because they have an anti-peace process or ant-Gerry Adams agenda, but because they need to tell their story. They need the world to hear what happened to them. Because of the issue withBoston College, I have non of the interviews on tape, and that is unfortunate. No matter how adept. I may be as a writer (a determination to come later this year, I suppose, when the book is published), my written words will pale in comparison to hearing Kevin Hannaway or Mickey Donnelly or Joe Clarke or Gerry. McKerr tell their own stories. I believe them to be brave and honest for speaking to me, not touts.
ReplyDeletePODCAST: The IRA, the Boston College Tapes and Who Tells the Past?
ReplyDeleteIt is such a startling admission from Adams, and it’s very astute of him to bury it within the McConville story (no pun intended) , he must assume this story will return in the future. I wonder if a ‘Voices from the Grave’ type book from a Special Branch employee is being mooted?
ReplyDeleteIn the early 1980's when there was an assassination attempt on him we now know that the bullets were doctored in advanced so that they wouldn't actually kill him.
This assertion, based on Martin Ingram, that the bullets were tampered with to prevent one assassination attempt doesn’t stack up. It was leaving too much to chance. They passed through the metal door easy enough, if John Gregg had shot through the glass window instead it could surely of been fatal. Typically the FRU jarked IRA guns to prevent firing at all, the ammo angle is too fantastical.
Dr Farrell
ReplyDeleteMany have written about interrogations,beatings or time spent in jail, Adams included. That is not the same as detailing particular operations and who was on them and who did what. So nobody could be accused of 'touting' for highlighting any mistreatment they might have suffered.
I would make the presumption that your proposed book 40 years after the fact will not capture the sense of urgency and horror that McGuffin's did in 1974 even though you have interviewed some of the same people.
You can kick this accusation around until the cows come home ,but it is beyond comprehension how both the quisling president for life and his cronie have survived relatively unscathed after being at the helm of the PIRA for decades,and so little time served between them, and its not due to lack of hard evidence,so it surly begs the question just how have these wasters survived . I believe both are touts .
ReplyDeleteI agree with Daithi in terms of the assassination attempt, if you are going to foil an assassination you don't let the trigger man fire, that particular story never made any sense to me.
ReplyDelete"they need to tell their story".
ReplyDeleteI fully agree with Dr Farrell. The violence of the Troubles, imprisonment etc traumatized many men and women who, in other circumstances, would have been normal citizens.
They need to make sense of what happened to them and their friends and families.
Telling their stories is one way of coming to terms with what happened to them.
Best wishes to Dr Farrell for the forthcoming book
Having said that,(and risking a lot of criticism on this site) I have a lot of reservations about the Boston tapes project
I have to agree with DaithiD on the doctored bullets but the limpet mine and Brian Nelson saving Adams' life was in the De Silva Report and before its publication he informed Adams that it would be mentioned...
ReplyDeleteAdams didn't say it was nonsense, likely fearful if he did, that other material likely backing it up would be brought forward.
Also, Ed says it was in May 1987 and if so then that was the same month when 8 IRA volunteers lost their lives at Loughgall...
eurofree2,
ReplyDeleteyou are totally entitled to your view of the BC project and to have as many reservations as you wish. No one should hurl abuse your way for that. Comment as you see fit and don't worry about the criticisms.
‘Say nothing’: silenced records and the Boston College subpoenas
ReplyDeleteDaithiD
ReplyDeleteIt does seem too far fetched to believe that the bullets were doctored...but then a quick reference to Adams' medical report would soon put pay to that....how severe were his wounds...did the bullets just penetrate the skin?
The questions are who was standing in the wings to replace him? Since the Brits controlled the Loyalist paramilitaries why did they allow it in the first place? They never colluded they controlled Loyalism. Was it a warning to Adams to comply or else? Who ever was standing in the wings....they should be scrutinized a little bit closer!
‘Boston College Touts’ Threat Discussed in Dáil Éireann
ReplyDeleteNiall,
ReplyDeleteI think the Adams attempt was just botched, I mean, I take it Gregg wasn't in on the conspiracy, so if that's the case, what happened if he decided to change arms late on etc. there are to many things that could have gone wrong if it was an elaborate warning, no for me they just fucked it.
Dixie,
I think with the benefit of hindsight it is obvious that Adams was a protected species. But for me that doesn't mean there was a legitimate attempt on his life. Brit intelligence, like all intelligence services, are compartmentalised and it is feasible that even if he was an asset to m.i.5 another intelligence wing, like m.r.f etc could have tried to kill him. Brit intelligence might be one of the best in machivellian tactics but they are not omnipotent or omniscient in fact they fuck up quite often. That what I think might have happened.
Niall, Ive got the ‘stakeknife’ book the claim is made in, and ‘Martin Ingram’ is relaying something he heard second hand from a FRU colleague who claims to have tampered with the bullets. Compare this elaborate scheme (with an indefinate outcome) with Martin McGuinness simply being warned by MI5 that Micheal Stone was targetting him for assasination and to vary his daily routine, and also Brian Nelson being warned off the limpet mine attack as Adams was a dove in the Army Council.
ReplyDeletePSNI ACCUSE ADAMS of Working for MI5
ReplyDeletePoor Gerry there is just no pleasing some people.
Seems Columbo is on the case...
ReplyDeleteInteresting link on the Dáil discussion Anthony. In terms of the idea Adams has been in the pay of British Intelligence since 1972 it's something that at first I found difficult to believe until I discussed it with someone who's opinion I respect and he said it has to be strongly considered when the information about his paedophile father and later the brother too is factored in. It would be inconceivable that this was not used to lean on him but at the end of the day it still proves nothing. That it has come out in this manner though is no coincidence, I would not in the slightest be surprised if this scumbag has been working for the Brits for quite some time and if that is the case it raises serious questions about the killing spree in Tyrone during the 1980s and where the Brits were getting their information. Dixie mentioned Loughall there but you have to wonder what went wrong. High-level information had to have been passed on to warrant the resources that were fired at that operation. The IRA's internal investigations determined the planning was compartmentalised to best avoid such leaks so where the hell did the information come from? It might not be a stretch to suggest someone in the leadership was helping the Brits remove the hawks to smooth the path for a ceasefire. What happened later in Clonoe can be viewed in a similar light, an operation that brought to an end a long series of brutal British Army executions of IRA Volunteers in Tyrone. Hopefully some day more light can be shone on this terrible period of our history and just how compromised the IRA's leadership actually was and its role in betraying others to stay on top. Brendan Hughes said Belfast was rotten and it's hard to see it as being any other way, the whole thing is uncomfortable to even think about. What's for certain is that the touts in the leadership were not routed by the exposure and killing of Denis Donaldson and that is actually quite scary when you really think about it. Sinn Fein? I wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them - that being the Adams loyalists that sit atop the party
ReplyDeleteRaymond Gilmore recently stated he is prepared to return and name McGuinness in court. I would love him to explain why he never named him when he went super-grass. If he thinks McGuinness is any less protected now he maybe needs to give his head a shake. More likely cheap publicity for his book.
ReplyDeleteI meant to write that doesn't mean there WASN'T a legitimate attempt on his life. No good at this typing.
ReplyDeleteI always understood that the bullets were doctored in a Loyalist arms dump but not because of a specific plan to kill Gerry Adams. I read somewhere that bullets were often made less powerful rather than useless to allay suspicion and that one such batch was used on Adams.
ReplyDeleteHowever, how does this tally with the Republican understanding of collusion? Loyalists were more often helped than hindered, maybe there were more good apples than thought?
I can accept the British may have wanted Gerry Adams alive as they did a lot of research and the old adage of "better the devil you know" and knowing he was someone they can deal with rather than an unknown successor who wouldn't seek a peaceful settlement but to link the tampered bullets with this sounds more specious than plausible and to go further and suggest he was an informer is beyond comprehension for many reasons. Republicans fought a long war, more successfully than it would have done if Gerry was an informer; the peace process would have arrived quicker; he always upheld morale within Republicanism when he could have used more Machiavellian means to scupper the entire project.
I understand the arguments about his brother but practically every family would be vulnerable in some sense. Money problems, illness, crime, greed or other vulnerability.
There is a book out there that claims De Valera was a spy for the British. I look down on De Valera and his legacy for many reasons but I don't buy the story he was a spy just because I hate him.
Tiarna, there is a significant difference between being in jail or being beaten and being tortured; these men were tortured. And today, they have, for the most part, been marginalized at best, and some terrorized, by the Sinn Fein leadership for speaking the truth - just ask Mickey Donnelly what he and his family went through when they stood against Martin McGuinness. As for John McGuffin's book, and Fr. Faul and Msgr. Murray's before that, they were graphic in detail regarding the treatment the men were subjected to in 1971, but their story, and their pain, did not end then. I would say it is even more Important to tell their story now, when Britain continues to torture people it opposes, and when both the US and Israel use the Treatment of the Hooded Men as their benchmark for what type of interrogation is acceptable, and to make where the line is.
ReplyDeleteEurofree3, thank you. Theirs is a story that needs to be heard, so that people will understand that torture is wrong, and has long lasting and far reaching consequences, even after the physical wounds heal.
ReplyDeleteSimon,
ReplyDeleteTo be an intelligence agent, you don't necessarily have to be a tout in the traditional sense. What i mean by that is if m.i.5 had touts on the army council and every operation was foiled then there would be a restructuring and the touts nullified. I don't know if Adams was an agent but i don't think there is any doubt he was protected in terms of avoiding prison time.
One way or another Adams was coerced and lead republicans down a road that benefits only our enemies. Whether he was a willing participant in the destruction of armed republicanism or a deluded moron who believes the shite he preaches is up to the individual to reach their own conclusion, but what is beyond debate is Brit intelligence lead armed republicanism down the surrender road outlined by Kitson in '72 I don't see how that's possible without the willing cooperation of
respected leading republicans, which lead us to the uncomfortable assertion that leading members of the army mislead volunteers to the benefit of only the Brit establishment.
You start to question why did the leadership capitulate so easily and the logical answer is that some were compromised, the revelations about scap they years back confirmed people suspicions and we are now lead with the fact that the leadership was rotten, Donaldson etc so it is not beyond reason to assume that the overall leader of the movement was compromised otherwise how do you explain his actions throughout his tenure in particular post '98? Under Adam's leadership a once proud movement has become splintered, disillusioned, dispirited shadow of it's former self with the majority of republicans now supporting the Brit state. It is my belief that Brit intelligence played the long game and won and they couldn't have achieved it without influence over the republican leadership.
DETAILS: Ex-IRA prisoner Richard O’Rawe: I’ll sue Boston College for handing over tapes
ReplyDeleteDavid: "Under Adam's leadership a once proud movement has become splintered, disillusioned, dispirited shadow of it's former self with the majority of republicans now supporting the Brit state."
ReplyDeleteEither the leadership was full of British agents from the start in which case it was a conspiracy and many people fought, went to prison and died for a chimera so maybe the 30 year conflict deserves to be wound up or there were some agents, maybe some still in place thwarting and scuppering and giving information at every turn which is to be expected in any conflict of it's type. But the overwhelming majority of Republicans who accepted the peace settlement weren't agents and can think for themselves and accept that although it's not what they fought for the present day imperfect situation doesn't give them enough impetus to take up arms again. You might disagree with them but there are many intelligent people there who are not dupes or fools.
There are also people who disagree vehemently with Sinn Fein who again don't want violence. Perhaps a non-violent united movement to work towards Unity is what is needed?
Maybe the process was mismanaged. I certainly think the St. Andrews agreement and it's Triple Lock Veto was a mistake and many of the policies by present day Sinn Fein wouldn't have been contemplated before but you can't allow your past to fetter your future decisions.
Your past should guide and influence you but if there is going to be peace why live outside the box and stay away from the institutions purely because it is a partitionist settlement? Better to use influence for change. What's the alternative? Leave it for the Unionists to govern us?
However I agree it is less than perfect and there were occasions when Sinn Fein didn't speak up enough against many matters but is it worth going back to killing, dying and prison? Certainly not particularly if, as is likely, more agents will be put in place to scupper and thwart.
PSNI ‘still interested’ in Gerry Adams’ alleged role in McConville killing
ReplyDeleteSimon nearly every visible change in the North (save for the RUC sign change) would of came about anyway once the EU Human Rights Act was given Royal Assent. Stormount has no power in real governance i.e. security/defence, tax and spending amounts, totality of law making (its only allowed on devolved matters). To call it power sharing is a misnomer since the real power rests within the UK parliament, as it ever will. You can say its better to be in there to effect change, but what it took to get in there set back Republican objectives incomparably more than any potential gains to come.
ReplyDeleteSimon,
ReplyDeleteThere are numerous things the leadership could have down post ceasefire, it doesn't have to be a straight choice between g.f.a or war. I think most people are in agreement that the war is over however that doesn't mean who have to capitulate and betray your principles. They could have played to their strengths, mass civil disobedience making the six counties ungovernable without republican input. They could have said political advancement wouldn't be at the expense of republican beliefs and values, the manner in which they conducted themselves post g.f.a is a betrayal of republican doctrine and what have they achieved? as Daithi said improvements in civil right would have happened regardless of sinn fein.
I am in no doubt that a lot of seasoned republicans thought that the g.f.a was a good stepping stone and supported it of the back of their own deliberations and that's up to them. In your original post you said it wasn't feasible for Adams to be an agent and gave your reasons, i disagreed and pointed out that leading provies have been outed as touts. Whether Adams was an agent or not we can only speculate but how can you blame people for coming to this conclusion based on past revelations and the actions of the hierarchy. The fact is the g.f.a was sixteen years ago and we are further away than ever from a united Ireland that on it's own says enough for me
Gerry Adams Arrest ‘A Wake-Up Call’ For Oral Historians
ReplyDeleteDaithiD "nearly every visible change in the North (save for the RUC sign change) would of came about anyway once the EU Human Rights Act was given Royal Assent."
ReplyDeleteI think you are referring to the UK's Human Rights Act 1998 rather than the European Convention on Human Rights which is a completely separate body than the EU.
All the UK's Human Rights Act does is allow UK individuals to use UK courts to challenge decisions by public bodies which contravene laws under the European Convention on Human Rights. You could since the Convention was signed in the 1950s go to the European Court of Human Rights to challenge such decisions in any case and still can. In fact the UK's Act is weaker than the convention and the UK paid lip service to the European Court for decades in any case. At least in Europe since the law is stronger you are more likely to have grounds to win a case. Yes, since the 1950s.
When the UK was found to breach individuals' rights with using the 5 techniques of interrogation if you read Ian Cobain's book "Cruel Brittania" you will find they still torture although admittedly in more covert ways.
When the UK was found to breach suspect's rights by the Court by holding them for more than three days it only restricted their use of week long interrogations. It didn't stop them and not too long ago they brought in the 28 days rule. The European Court of Human Rights only has limited sanctions to bring against the UK although it provides more robust protection through a stronger set of Human Rights laws.
Stronger anti-terrorism laws within Europe would have nullified much protection in any case during the "war on terror". As for any non-emergency laws Strasbourg has always been there in any case.
What did the UK Human Rights Act change? It made it easier and faster to get a less beneficial ruling than to go to Strasbourg and get a stronger decision.
What did it change regarding Northern Ireland? Nada.
In terms of the theory on the bullets used for the assassination attempt on Adams there are a few facts to consider when weighing up the likelihood/possibility of this being more than an old wives' tale. The car he was travelling in was a black taxi and had no bullet proof glass, he was shot through the window. Brian Nelson has stated British Intelligence doctored the rounds when they heard Adams was the target. This is not a new thing. Greg told POWs in Long Kesh that as he shot Adams he couldn't believe the rounds were having no affect and amazingly Adams was out the next day with a sling on his arm. You could do worse injury to yourself falling off a bike. Nelson said he was told to protect people in Belfast, one being Scap. Francisco Notarantino was set up and allowed to be killed to cover the other Italian in Ballymurphy, that being the tout/agent Scap who was in fact the person on the loyalist's radar. Nelson also said he protected another top Provo - then told how the rounds for Adams job had been doctored by spooks. All these things actually happened so surely we have to ask what the fuck was really going on and why. We have Adams telling us the PSNI are accusing him of being an MI5 source and when you look at what's went on you have to at least admit stranger things have already happened
ReplyDeleteBell gets bail as PSNI postpone Adams response
ReplyDeleteBy this point TPQ policy is pretty clear.
ReplyDeleteComments from "Unknown" are not published on the blog.
That is not because there is something wrong with the comment per se. But with too many commenters seeking to post as “Unknown”, it leads to confusion and can feed the growth of sock puppets.
You can retain your anonymity but use a distinguishing name to avoid being confused with others who also seek to post as “Unknown.”
Simply sign off as "X" or whatever handle you choose.
Your “X” will mark your sport and remain your handle exclusively.
Agent or murderer once the Brits seen how far the PSF leadership would go for election politics causing 6 martyrs to die needlessly in my eyes is akin to murder.Once politics came to the fore the Brits did everything to accommodate them,Priors 1982 assembly elections were PSF won I think 5 seats might be 6 but all seats won came from areas the hunger stickers came from.Then there's the supergrass trials when the nationalist community filled with rage wanted action the supergrass charade starts simply to keep the level of violence way below what it would have been thus keeping voters onside simply put people won't vote for PSF if attacks and killings continued on daily basis these are just two instances of Brits helping steer PSF away from violence.What other treachery the leadership were involved in if it ever comes out can't surprise or shock since we know the depths they sunk during the hunger strike of 81.
ReplyDelete